BT 440 

.W3 

Copy 1 




4+0 



The Trial of Jesus 
Christ 

A Lecture in Two Parts 



JUDGE W. D. WEBB 



ClassIC 

Book. 

CotMlghtN 

COPYRIGHT DEPOSIT. 



The Trial of Jesus 
Chrift 

A Ledture in Two Parts 

By JUDGE W. D. WEBB 

PART FIRST 

" The Trial Before Caiaphas and The Sanhedrin " 

PART SECOND 
" The Trial Before Pontius Pilate n 



^4r 



Schauer & Burbank, Publishers 
Atchison, Kansas 
1907 



UBKARYof CONGRESS 
Two Copies Received 
JUN 6 190f 
. Copyright Eafry 

cuss^ (X XXc„ No, 

/7-9'/'9 

COPY B. 



Copyright, 1907, by W. D. Webb 

All rights reserved. 
Published May, 1907. 



PART FIRST. 



THE TRIAL OF JESUS CHRIST 



PART FIRST. 

^ HE Jewish Sanhedrin, my friends, was 
^ ^ Supreme Judicial and Ecclesiastical 

Tribunal of Israel. It was composed of 

— — * seventy members, presided over by an 

High Priest, or President, seated in an elevated po- 
sition. Upon his right, sat the Vice President, or 
Father of the House of Judgment. Upon his left a 
Referee, occupying the place because of his supposed 
superior learning and experience, and with whom 
the High Priest advised whenever he wanted coun- 
sel, on questions that came before him for decision. 
Upon each side, and in front of these venerable and 
august officials, in a semi-circle, sat a row of elderly 
men, and in front of these, a row T of middle aged 
men, and in front of these again, a row of young 
men. These young men were called disciples. 
Twenty-three of this number constituted a quorum, 
and could transact business and were called "Little 
Sanhedrin." The larger number was called the 
"Great Sanhedrin." 

Under the Hebrew Law the punishment of death 
for crime was inflicted by stoning. 

Under the Roman Law, at least in Palestine, it 
was by crucifixion. Crucifixion was the most hor- 
rible death that could be inflicted on a human being. 
People sometimes lingered three days and nights on 



6 



THE TRIAL OF JESUS CHRIST 



the cross, in the most excruciating agony, before 
death came to their relief. 

The Hebrew Law also provided that no person 
should be subjected to a torturing or lingering death. 
It also provided, that no charge should be considered 
as preferred against a man until two witnesses had 
sworn to the commission of the offense, and had 
identified the person who committed it. It also pro- 
vided that the witnesses upon whose testimony a 
person was convicted in a capital case, that is, of a 
crime punishable with death, should cast the first 
stone, and I suppose it was on this provision of the 
Hebrew Law. that Christ based his remark, when he 
said to the men, who were accusing the woman, 
"Let him who is without sin, first cast a stone." 

There is one thing, that mankind is too apt to for- 
get : it is this, that the central event in history is a 
judicial trial. The trial of an humble., uneducated 
man, a Judean peasant, so poor that he went on foot 
through the world. A wise man indeed, but not a 
philosopher, a King who, if he had royalty, was 
without family, whom nobody had chosen, born in 
a manger, and whom fortune had not furnished 
with sufficient means to enable him to procure 
shelter from either storm or sunshine — who had 
not where to lay His head — whose mission 
it was to suffer, and who was the lowli- 
est and humblest of men. That the trial and 
execution of such a person should be of any consid- 
erable importance to the world is indeed wonderful. 

History presents many Judicial tragedies, capital 



THE TRIAL OF JESUS CHRIST 



7 



trials like that of Socrates, Charles the First of Eng- 
land, Mary of Scotland/ persons of great learning or 
royal blood; but the trial and execution of Jesus 
Christ, has produced a more profound impression 
on the world than all others combined. And this is 
perhaps more so from the fact that a few words in 
Tacitus, a disputed sentence or two in Josephus, 
some references and execrations in the Talmud, is 
about all there is, in what we will venture to call 
contemporaneous literature, concerning Jesus of 
Nazareth; yet the civilized world keeps Christmas 
day in honor of His birth. He rose from the dead 
and Easter is everywhere observed; and, as if time 
stopped at His tomb and tarried in his flight, when 
He comes forth a new Sabbath sheds its glorious 
light upon the world, to commemorate His victory 
over death and the grave. 

Nor is this all. At the birth of this Judean 
Peasant, the calendar clock of the world's time is 
stopped and re-set, and the cycles of the years both 
backward and forward are from thenceforth counted 
from his coming; and we are twenty centuries re- 
moved from the time when the star of Bethlehem 
guided the wise men of the East to his manger 
cradle. 

When Caesar dies at the foot of Pompey's statue 
the current of Roman history is changed. But when 
Jesus Christ dies on Calvary, a moral revolution, 
greater than any the world has ever witnessed, trans- 
forms centuries. The influence of the life, person- 
ality and death of Jesus Christ has no parallel in 



8 



THE TRIAL OF JESUS CHRIST 



history. It can have none. There is nothing like 
it. There is nothing that can be like it. The in- 
fluence of the life, personality and death of Alexan- 
der and Hannibal and Caesar and Charlemagne and 
Xapoleon were but temporary and local. The king- 
doms they built have long since crumbled away. But 
the kingdom established by Jesus Christ, still sur- 
vives and will endure forever. Another such life, 
history and death, with like results, would be as 
miraculous as the making of a world. These mirac- 
ulous conditions cannot be accounted for, except 
upon the fact that Christ was what he claimed to 
be, the Son of God. 

Jesus Christ was a Jew. It was the Jews who 
caused him to be crucified. In the Talmud, their 
sacred book, he is spoken of as a youth of great 
beauty, eloquence and promise, who. being educated 
at the Jerusalem college of the Rabbi's was led by 
ambition to set up opposing doctrines, and to assert 
his authority in opposition to them. They admit, in 
these, their sacred volumes, that he performed stu- 
pendous miracles, in general such as is recorded in 
the Xew Testament, and claim to account for it by 
this absurd statement — that he secretly entered the 
Holy of Holies in the Jerusalem temple, and stole 
from thence the ineffable name of Jehovah, which 
he hid in a gash in the flesh of his arm. that by that 
name he was enabled to perform these wonders. But 
this being taken away from Him while He was 
asleep. He lost all miraculous power and so fell an 
easy prey to His enemies, and was publicly exe- 



THE TRIAL OF JESUS CHRIST 



9 



cuted. That His disciples stole away His body and 
claimed that He had risen from the dead. 

The death and burial of Jesus Christ was the re- 
sult of a two-fold criminal trial. One under the 
Hebrew and one under the Roman law. All lawyers 
concede that the most august of all jurisprudences is 
that of ancient Rome. But the most peculiar and 
probably the most venerable is that of the Jewish 
Commonwealth. In the trial of Jesus Christ these 
two famous and diverse systems of jurisprudence 
met. And they met in the most striking and influ- 
ential event, indeed, that has ever occurred on this 
earth, as well, also, as it is the most important. The 
Hebrew trial, or the Hebrew branch of the trial, 
came first. Without doubt Christ knew the security 
the law- governing criminal trials in capital cases, 
furnished the accused; and knew also what his rights 
were. He knew that the Hebrew Commonwealth 
and the institutions regulated by it were pervaded 
by a deep sense of justice ; righteousness and law. 
The Talmud consists of forty folios or books, the 
central part of which is comprised in twelve volumes 
and is called the Mishna. The Mishna consists al- 
most entirely of law. It was compiled about two 
hundred years after the death of Christ, from oral 
law, which had been growing in use and authority 
ever since the return of the nation from Babylon, 
and was a brief abstract of about eight hundred 
years legal production. It was as familiar to the 
Hebrew people as the "lex mercatoria" or the "law 
merchant," that is the law governing bills of ex- 



10 



THE TRIAL OF JESUS CHRIST 



change and promissory notes, is today to us and 
the people of England, and it came into use in 
about the same way. This code of the criminal 
law of the Jews, which was in existence at the 
date of the High Priestship of Annas and Caiaphas, 
was as well understood by the Jewish people as the 
common law is understood by us and the people of 
Great Britain. Christ was doubtless as familiar 
with it as any other subject of the Jewish Com- 
monwealth. He knew that He was guarded on 
every side of the g~reat principles of justice and 
security from punishment unless surely guilty 
of crime, that pervaded the Jewish system 
of criminal jurisprudence. Some of these principles 
which were clearly and distinctly understood by ev- 
ery person of reasonable intelligence and informa- 
tion among the Jews, were as follows : "Thou 
shalt do no unrighteousness in the judgment." 
"When a judge decides not according to truth, he 
makes the majesty of God depart from Israel; but if 
lie judges according to truth, were it only for one 
hour, it is as if he had established the whole world; 
for it is in judgment that the Divine presence in Is- 
rael has its habitation." "Be cautious and slow in 
judgment; send forth many disciples, and make a 
fence around the law." 

Christ was doubtless aware also, of the differ- 
ence in Hebrew law, between civil and criminal 
cases. That is, the difference between trials for 
money and trials for life. Long before the time of 
Jesus the value set by the law on the life of a He- 



THE TRAIL OF JESUS CHRIST 



11 



brew citizen had led to extraordinary precautions. 
They had four great rules in their criminal juris- 
prudence, they were: First. "Strictness in the ac- 
cusation." And then the testimony had to be con- 
fined strictly to the accusation. Second. "Publicity 
in the discussion." They had no right to try one 
in secret, everybody had the right to attend. Third. 
"Full freedom accorded to the accused." They had 
no right to imprison one during a trial, or to bind 
him with cords. Fourth. "Assurance against all 
danger of errors in testimony." 

It will be observed that these rules lean, almost 
ostentatiously, to the side of the accused, in cases 
of trials for life. Indeed, so far does this go, that 
modern Jews are disposed to resent capital punish- 
ment, as abhorent to the whole system of Hebrew 
jurisprudence. 

The Mishna quotes the saying of Eleazor that, 
"The sanhedrin which so often as once in seven 
years condemns a man to death is a slaughter 
house." One of the writers of the Mishna, Rabbi 
Meir, says : "What doth God say when the male- 
factor suffers the anguish due to his crime. He says, 
'My head and limbs are pained,' and if he so speaks 
of the sufferings of the guilty, what would he say 
when the righteous is condemned," and so, to save 
innocent blood, to hedge around and shelter the 
sacred house of life, rule after rule was laid down in 
successive lines of circumvalation and presumption, 
in favor of the accused, and were accumulated until 
a false conviction became impossible. Under such 



12 



THE TRIAL OF JESUS CHRIST 



rules as these, it hardly seems the Saviour could 
have been convicted. For the purpose now of laying 
the foundations for further showing how the laws 
of the Hebrew commonwealth were violated, in the 
trial of Jesus Christ, we will call attention to the 
difference in Hebrew law between trials for money 
and trials for life. 

Trials for money could be commenced only in the 
daytime, but might be concluded after night fall — 
trials for life could be commenced only in daytime 
and must be concluded in the daytime. Trials for 
money could be concluded either by condemnation 
or acquittal, on the day on which they were begun 
— trials for life could be concluded on the day on 
which they were begun, if there were an acquittal, 
but if a conviction, the)- must be postponed until the 
second day. For this reason, (now mark this please) 
capital trials could not be held on the day before 
the Sabbath (Friday) nor a feast day, or an high 
day. 

Christ was arrested on Thursday night. When 
Peter and John a little later were taken into custody 
they were put into a ward until the next day "be- 
cause it was eventide.'' But Christ was led by his 
armed escort immediately into the presence of An- 
nas, who, after some examination, and illegal ques- 
tions, sent him bound to Caiaphas, probably another 
department of the sacredotal palace. But at all 
events immediately after his arrest that night, and 
in the night time, an examination took place, and 
then somewhat later but during the same night, the 



THE TRIAL OF JESUS CHRIST 



18 



form, or order of a regular public trial was pro- 
ceeded with. Witnesses were examined, and what 
we will call the confession was made, and condemna- 
tion pronounced. And this trial upon the assem- 
bling of the Council in the morning was confirmed. 
All this was illegal and in gross violation of the 
laws and rules of procedure in criminal cases." 

The better opinion undoubtedly is that the cruci- 
fixion took place on Friday, the day before the Sab- 
bath, which was also an high-tlay. The meeting of 
the great council to review and approve his sentence 
of death, took place on the same Friday morning 
Christ having been arrested on Thursday night, 
could not be legally put upon His trial that night, nor 
Friday, because it was the day before the Sabbath, 
and an high-day, nor Saturday, because it was the 
•Sabbath, and not until Sunday. Such a meeting, 
therefore, of the great council, was forbidden by 
Jewish law, unless it were to register an acquittal; 
but if the Court was unable at once to acquit, it was 
bound to adjourn for at least twenty-four hours be- 
fore meeting for final judgment. And such final 
meeting- could not be lawfully held on the Sabbath. 
The necessity of an adjournment of a capital trial 
in order to secure the rights of the accused, is very 
clearly shown by tlie detail, regulations of the Mish- 
na. 

I quote, "If a man is found innocent the Court ab- 
solves him. But if not his judgment is put off to 
the following day. Meantime, the judges meet to- 
gether, and eating little meat and drinking no wine, 



14 



THE TRIAL OF JESUS CHRIST 



during the whole clay., they confer upon the cause. 
On the following day they return into Court, and 
vote over again., with the like precautions as before. 

"If judgment is at last pronounced, they bring out 
the man sentenced and stone him. The place of 
punishment is apart from the place of judgment. In 
the meantime an officer is to stand at the door of 
the Court with a handkerchief in his hand ; another, 
mounted on horseback, follows the procession so far, 
but halts at the farthest point where he can see the 
man with the handkerchief. The judges remain sit- 
ting and if anyone offers himself to prove that the 
condemned man is innocent, he at the door waves 
the handkerchief, and the horseman instantly gallops 
after the condemned and recalls him for further de- 
fense." 

The period when these rules and principles were 
growing in use and authority stretched from the re- 
turn from the captivity, to about before Christ 220, 
and this age of judicial caution was succeeded by the 
so-called age of the "Sanhedrin," which for the next 
400 years worked out in detail and perfected these 
rules, so that, it seems that at the time of the trial 
of Jesus Christ, in trials for life, these rules of al- 
most pedantic caution were being administered and 
applied, above all other things by the Sanhedrin. 
The Jewish law set the highest possible value on the 
life of a Hebrew citizen. Hence these extraordinary 
precautions in the administration of the criminal 
laws of the Jews. In no case were these rules so 
absolutely necessary to justice as where the ac- 



THE TRIAL OF JESUS CHRIST 



15 



eased was arrested after nightfall and put upon his 
trial before daybreak, without any opportunity to 
summon witnesses in his defense. The open injus- 
tice of putting Christ upon His trial under the cloud 
of night, in violation of these time honored and 
judicious principles was an atrocity never before 
witnessed in Hebrew jurisprudence. It would have 
been an intolerable scandal even in a civil suit. 
But that a grave criminal case, involving a pro- 
nounciation of the death penalty on a son of Isreal, 
acknowledged to be "mighty in deed and word 
before all the people." should be begun, continued 
and finished, and the sentence of death pronounced 
between midnight and morning was a violence done 
to the forms and rules of Hebrew law. as well as 
the principles of justice. 

I am aware that many eminent ecclesiastics claim 
that there were seven distinct and separate trials of 
the Saviour. Dean Farrar says, there were six. 
This to me, however, does not seem to be so. In 
my judgment there were but two; one before 
Caiaphas and the little Sanhedrim in the night time 
approved of in the morning by the great Sanhedrin 
under the Hebrew, and one before Pontius Pilate, 
under the Roman law. But these two trials were 
for different alleged offenses. Christ was arrested 
on Thursday night, April 14th, A. D. 30, when he 
was thirty-three years of age. Jesus was born, you 
will remember, four years earlier than the time 
from which we date, or before Christ 4, in the 750th 
year of Rome. After his arrest that night he was 



16 



THE TRIAL OF JESUS CHRIST 



taken immediately into the presence of Annas. 
There may be some question as to whether Annas 
was a high priest. The Tews so regarded him. but 
he had been deposed by the Roman power, and, as 
his authority might be questioned when the case 
should go before Pilate, the Roman governor. An- 
nas doubtless deemed it advisable to send him to 
Caiaphas. his son-in-law. about whose official char- 
acter there was no question, as he was an high priest 
that year under Roman appointment. 

Annas was by far the most influential member 
of the Sanhedrim He had five sons in that body. 
By Annas. Jesus was sent to Caiaphas. but not, 
however, until an examination before him was com- 
menced, probably by sitting privately, but certainly 
before any accusation was made or before any wit- 
nesses were called. The first of the four great rules, 
therefore, of the Hebrew criminal law was violated. 
Strictness in the accusation. 

It was violated in there not being any accusation 
at all. The depositions of the first witnesses were, 
under the Hebrew law. the accusation. Without 
any such deposition being made Annas asked Jesus 
of his disciples and his doctrine. Jesus answered in 
surprise. "I spoke openly to the world. I ever taught 
in the synagogues, and in the temple whither the 
Jews always resort, and in secret spake I nothing. 
Why asketh thou me? Ask them that have heard 
me what I spake to them, behold they know what 
I said.''' This was in every word the voice of Hebrew 
justice, founded on the broad principles of their 



THE TRIAL OF JESUS CHRIST 



17 



judicial procedure, and recalling an unjust judge 
to the first duty of his great office. He had no right 
to ask Christ this question It was the first duty 
of this august and venerable official, if he were to 
act at all, to inform Christ of the charge against 
Him, by the sworn testimony of witnesses. 

It was this rule or principle of the Hebrew law 
which gives the fullest explanation of the answers 
of Jesus to the midnight questioning's of this deposed 
High Priest. This answer of Jesus conveys to this 
High Priest the startling intelligence that Christ 
knew the law, and knew what His rights were. It 
was a demand for an open accusation and trial 
under the rules and forms of Hebrew law. It was 
a demand that the offense, if any, should be proven 
by the testimony of witnesses. Annas had been a 
High Priest for more than twenty years and was 
trained in the law of the Hebrew Commonwealth. 
He knew that it was unlawful to proceed with this 
trial in the night time. He knew that no man could 
be convicted in a capital case on his own confession. 
He knew that the accused had the right to a strict 
accusation under the testimony of witnesses. He 
knew that full freedom was to be accorded to the 
accused. He knew that he had no right to bind 
Christ. And he knew that Christ had the right 
to remind him of his duty, and of His own rights, 
by saying to him, "I spoke openly to the world. I 
ever taught in the synagogue and in the temple 
whither the Jews always resort, and in secret I spake 
nothing. Why asketh thou me? Ask them which 



IS 



THE TRIAL OF JESUS CHRIST 



have heard me what I have said unto them. Be- 
hold they know what I said." But when He 
made this appeal, for that which under the law was 
His right, an officer standing by struck Jesus in the 
face, saying: "Answerest thou the High Priest so?" 
The meek and lowly Saviour turning to the cruel 
officer said : "If I have spoken evil, bear witness of 
the evil, but if well, why smitest thou me?" This 
expressed a desire on the part of Jesus to submit 
to that High Priest, whether or not He had the 
right to answer him as Pie had done. ''Bear wit- 
ness of the evil," that is, complain of Me to the 
Court and let the Court say whether I have the 
right to be heard in My own defense before you 
strike any more. It was too, an appeal for pro- 
tection from further cruelty by the officers of the 
Court. It was an appeal for that freedom of 
speech, for that liberty of the accused, secured to 
every Hebrew citizen charged with an offense. 
It was an appeal for public justice. 

But Annas answered this pathetic appeal by send- 
ing Him bound, with an armed force, to Caiaphas. 
[Meantime much was going on outside. The mem- 
bers of the Sanhedrin present were seeking for 
witnesses against Christ. Matthew says, ''False 
witnesses." The manner in which they were pro- 
ceeding was grossly illegal and unjust. Hebrew 
judges, under their law, were counsel for the ac- 
cused. Besides it was the duty of the High Priest 
to pronounce to each witness who came to testify 
against the life of a Hebrew citizen an address or 



THE TRIAL OF JESUS CHRIST 



19 



solemn adjuration, which still exists in the body of 
the Hebrew law. I quote it in full. The witness 
standing and the High Priest rising addresses him, 
saying: "Forget not, O, witness, that it is one thing 
to give evidence in a trial for money, and another 
in a trial for life. In a money suit if thy witness 
bearing shall do wrong, money may repair that 
wrong. But in this trial for life, if thou sinnest 
the blood of the accused and the blood of his seed 
to the end of time shall be imputed to thee. There- 
fore., was Adam created one man and alone to 
teach thee that if thy witness shall destroy one soul 
out of Isreal, he is held by the Scripture to be as 
if he had destroyed the world, and he who saves 
one such soul, to be as if he had saved the 
world. For a man, from one signet ring, may 
strike off many impressions, and all of them may 
be exactly alike ; but he, the King of the Kings, 
of Kings, He the Holy and Blessed, has struck off 
from his type of the first man the forms of all 
men that shall live ; yet so that no one human being 
shall be wholly alike to any other. Wherefore., let 
us think and believe that the whole world is created 
for a man, such as he whose life now hangs on thy 
words." 

Who can measure the effect of this solemn ad- 
dress, by the Sacred Judge of Israel, upon men. 
who while it was being uttered were forced to gaze 
into the face of him, whose life it guarded? And 
yet what a mockery it was for that High Priest, 
who was himself a party to hunting for witnesses, 



20 



THE TRIAL OF JESUS CHRIST 



to pronounce this solemn adjuration to the wit- 
nesses who came to testify against the life of Christ, 
when he himself had declared in that very case that 
he "'deemed it expedient that one man should die 
for the people.'' 

But Christ is now on trial before Caiaphas and 
the little Sanhedrin in the night time, and on the 
very night of his arrest, and no charge is yet pre- 
ferred against Him. 

I have been unable, indeed, to determine for 
what He at first was arrested. 

In Hebrew criminal trials the rule was that, "the 
least discordance in the testimony of the witnesses 
destroys its value." The depositions, however, of 
the leading witnesses, as before stated, constituted 
the charge; but when they spoke, the witnesses 
must agree together. Caiaphas and his Court are 
now at sea. They are hunting in that mob for 
persons who will testify to facts against Christ 
which will make a crime punishable by death. Two 
witnesses were found, and came, and testified as 
follows : One said, 'This man said, T am able to 
destroy the temple of God and to build it again in 
three days.' " The other said, "We heard Him 
say, T will destroy this temple, which is made with 
hands, and in three days will build another made 
without hands.' " 

Suppose that either, or both, of these witnesses 
stated the truth, what is the offense? For us to 
understand that either of these alleged and, indeed, 
false declarations contain a criminal charge they 



THE TRIAL OF JESUS CHRIST 



21 



should be accompanied by what, in our law are 
called innuendoes ; that is, there should be attached 
to them an explanation like this, for instance, "We 
heard Him say, 'I will destroy this temple, that 
is made with hands, and in three days I will build 
another made without hands,' " meaning thereby, 
that He could destroy existing institutions, the law 
and the prophets ; or meaning thereby, that He 
possessed supernatural power; or meaning thereby, 
that He could change the customs, which Moses 
delivered to us ; or meaning thereby, that He could 
overturn the Roman power in Palestine. With this 
construction some of these charges would perhaps 
be, if untrue under the Hebrew law, blasphemy, 
and some might, perhaps, under the Roman law, 
be treason. It will be observed, hereafter, that 
when Christ was brought before Pilate, the High 
Priest sought to charge Him with treason against 
the Roman power. Let us now apply the rule of 
evidence that the, "Least discordance between the 
testimony of the witnesses destroys its value/'' and 
see where Caiaphas and his Court stand. 

One witness says, "This man said, 'I am able 
to destroy the temple of God and to build another 
in three days/ " The other said, "We heard Him 
say, 'I will destroy this temple, that is made with 
hands, and in three days I will build another made 
without hands.' " 

Nothing said by the first witness about "destroy- 
ing the temple of God and building another in three 
days." Nothing said by the last witness about de- 



22 



THE TRIAL OF JESUS CHRIST 



stroying "a temple made with hands and in three 
days building another, made without hands." 

The discordance is very great, and the evangelist 
says, "and not even so did their witnesses agree 
together. " They do not yet have an accusation 
against Christ and it is long past midnight. The 
situation for Caiaphas is becoming embarrassing. 
He has caused this man to be arrested without any 
charge being made against Him. He is unable 
now to make one himself, and he can find no one 
to do it for him. He must be relieved from this 
dilemma or he will be judicially and ecclesiastically 
disgraced. The situation, therefore, is not only be- 
coming embarrassing, but it is becoming desperate, 
and desperate conditions must be met with desper- 
ate measures. And Caiaphas now resorts to them. 
Here they are : "And the High Priest stood up in 
the midst and asked Jesus saying, 'Answerest thou 
nothing? What is it which these witness 
against thee?'" But He held His peace and an- 
swered nothing. He was under no obligation to 
answer. There was nothing charged against Him, 
and under the law He was not called upon to an- 
swer. The witnesses had destroyed each other, and 
Christ was still unaccused of a crime, and Caiaphas 
knew it, and he knew also that by calling on Christ 
to answer he was violating the law, and trampling 
under his sacerdotal feet the legal rights of Jesus 
of Nazareth. The fact undoubtedly is that the 
general course, of this night's proceedings, had 
been agreed upon by the leading members of the 



THE TRIAL OF JESUS CHRIST 



23 



Sanhedrin, before Christ was arrested, and that 
they, and not the witnesses, were conducting this 
prosecution and that in this august assembly the 
suppression, and probably the death of Christ, was 
prearranged. 

"Answerest thou nothing? What is it which 
these witness against thee?" But the High Priest 
does not elicit an answer. The interrogation was 
unlawful. This silence, however, on the part of 
Jesus was not attributable to indignation caused by 
the willful misconduct of his accusers or the un- 
fairness of his judges. It is believed that the ordin- 
ary rights of every Hebrew was present to the mind 
of Jesus, from the beginning to the end of this 
tragedy. He had no expectation of escaping, nor, 
indeed, any desire to do so. That very night in 
the garden he had submitted Himself to the ter- 
rible ordeal through which He was passing. He 
had prayed. "Oh, my father, if it be possible let 
this cup pass from me. Nevertheless, not as I 
will, but as Thou wilt." This was submission. All 
the gospel narratives combine to show that he had 
for some time been consciously moving on to this 
tragical and tremendous closing of His brief earth- 
ly career. His utterances in anticipation of it, dur- 
ing the previous week, and especially on the pre- 
ceding day, show that He had not come to Jerusa- 
lem to perish by mistake. His silence during these 
proceedings mark the sublime heights of the self- 
possession which attended Him all through this try- 
ing night. If we are to inquire what were His 



24 



THE TRIAL OF JESUS CHRIST 



thoughts, we may suppose that they had reference 
to the scene which surrounded Him. There were 
gathered before and around Him the children of 
the House of Isreal, represented in their supreme 
council and greatest assembly. To this people he 
had always declared Himself commissioned. He 
had said, "I am not sent but unto the lost sheep 
of the House of Israel." In His instructions to 
His disciples He said, "Go not unto the way of the 
Gentiles, and into any city of the Samaritans enter 
ye not, but go rather to the lost sheep of the House 
of Israel." How He loved that people. Now at 
least they have thus met and all the ages of Israel's 
past arise in the mind of Him, who stands there 
to be judged, but who is thereafter to judge. But 
dawn is approaching and this deed of darkness 
must be completed during the night, and they have 
not yet found any testimony upon which a charge 
against Christ can stand. Having failed thus far 
to accuse Christ of anything worthy of death they 
cried out, "Art Thou the Christ, tell us?" To the 
eager hostile passionate and desperate questionings 
of this judicial assembly Jesus answered with a 
two-fold utterance. 

"If I tell you, ye will not believe," was His calm 
reply. Was He thinking sadly of their utter dis- 
regard of His legal rights and the consequences of 
it to Himself and to them? "And if I also ask 
you," as He had done a few days before in the 
temple when they demanded His authority — "If 
I also ask you, ye will not answer Me and you will 



THE TRIAL OF JESUS CHRIST 



25 



not release Me." The Jewish law provided that 
no man could be convicted of a capital offense 
on his own confession. Because of the illegal cues- 
tions they were asking Him, they saw T in His face 
a light of more than earthly censure; and a mix- 
ture of terrible and hateful emotions, starting to 
their feet, they all cried, "Art Thou then the Son 
of God?" But above that assembly of aged and 
evil faces was now seen rising the High Priest of 
Israel; and all voices sunk away as the chief judge 
magistrate of the sacred nation arose, and demand- 
ed in the name of that God, whose office He bore, 
an answer to his most solemn adjuration. 

"I adjure Thee by the living God that Thou tell 
us whether Thou be the Christ, the Son of God." 
This was the question for which the world stood 
waiting and the answer must be given. Angels 
poised on steady wing were hovering there to carry 
it back to heaven. Oh, the importance and the re- 
sponsibility of this answer. Is Christ equal to the 
occasion? Yes, for now the answer came. "I am 
the Christ," that is : the Son of God. Then turning 
to the seventy that constituted the Sanhedrin sitting 
in their places of power, he said, "Hereafter ye shall 
see the Son of Man sitting on the right hand of 
power and coming in the clouds of heaven." 

For any person to claim to be, "the Christ, the 
Son of God," under Jewish law was blasphemy, un- 
less it were true, and blasphemy was punishable 
by death. They had not yet found any one who 
could make the charge. And Christ was under no 



26 



THE TRIAL OF JESUS CHRIST 



obligation, legal or moral, to the Court, whatever 
may have been His obligation to the world and to 
heaven to answer this question of the High Priest. 
If He remained silent He must be absolved and the 
hatred of the High Priest, the Sanhedrin and the 
mob remain unappeased, and the nocturnal pro- 
ceedings of the supreme judicial and ecclesiastical 
tribunal of Israel result in failure. Hence, the at- 
tempt of the Sanhedrin to induce Christ to a con- 
fession by the question, ''Art Thou the Christ, tell 
us?" and, failing in this attempt, the High Priest 
rises and says, "I adjure Thee by the living God 
that Thou tell us whether Thou be the Christ, the 
Son of God/' If he had said no, I am not, the 
world's greatest tragedy would have ended there. 
He knew the tremendous consequences that hung 
on his answer to that question. A world redeemed 
or lost. He knew also the consequences to Him- 
self. That very night in the garden while "sweat- 
ing as it were great drops of blood," He had prayed 
for the third time, "Oh, my Father, if it be pos- 
sible, let this cup pass from me. Nevertheless, not 
as I will, but as Thou wilt." And in answer to 
this prayer angels came and strengthened Him. "I 
am the Christ, — the Son of God. Hereafter ye 
shall see the Son of Man, sitting on the right hand 
of power and coming in the clouds of heaven/' 
There was no equivocation to this answer. Neither 
the High Priest nor the Sanhedrin could mistake 
His meaning. He had come into the world to re- 
deem it with His blood. Blood is the price of re- 



THE TRIAL OF JESUS CHRIST 



27 



demption. For the life of the flesh is in the blood, 
— that mystic power, enshrined in blood, the deep- 
est, holiest secret of creation, that no scientist can 
analyze, more significant, indeed, than all the hid- 
den treasures and choisest gems of earth. The 
blood itself he can analyze, but the life it enshrines 
is beyond his skill. He said it was for this that 
I was born. The ordinance of Israel provided that 
when any person blasphemed the name of God 
every man who heard it should rend his garment, 
from the top downwards. Then the High Priest 
rent his garment saying, "what further need have 
we of witnesses. Behold now, ye have heard the 
blasphemy, what think ye?" And they answered 
and said, "He is guilty of death." Oh, what a con- 
fession this was of that High Priest to go down the 
ages, that they had failed to legally convict the 
Saviour of mankind. And they all condemned 
Him to die. Here now is the sentence that Caia- 
phas and the Sanhedrin pronounced upon Jesus 
Christ. 

"Jerusalem, Friday, April 15th, A. U. C 783," 
(that is 783 years from the founding of the City 
of Rome,) "Jesus of Nazareth is condemned to 
death by us for committing blasphemy. 

Joseph Caiaphas, 

President. 
Annas, 

Father of the House of Judgment.' ' 
"It is a fundamental principle with us," says Bar- 
tanora, one of the writers of the Talmud, "That 



28 



THE TRIAL OF JESUS CHRIST 



no man can damage himself by what he says in 
judgment." Maimonides, one of the most eminent 
of Jewish writers, and the author of an exhaustive 
treatise on the Mishna, says, "Our law condemns 
no man to death on his own confession. " Putting 
these questions, therefore, to Jesus was unlawful 
and a violation of formal justice,and the sentence 
of death pronounced was not only unauthorized, 
but was forbidden by Jewish law. 

Assuming now that the claim made by Jesus, 
that He was the Son of God, had come to the same 
form, but lawfully, before the Sanhedrin, were they 
not bound to give Christ an opportunity to procure 
His witnesses, and to consider whether such claim 
might not be true? What a magnificant array of 
witnesses He could have produced if He had de- 
sired to escape the dreadful death that awaited 
Him. If He had asked for time, and it had been 
given Him, He could have produced them there 
in Court and said, "Here, Caiaphas are my wit- 
nesses; the work that I do are evidence of mesiah- 
ship. Here is the leper I cleansed. Here is the 
centurian whose servant I healed; and here, too, 
is the servant himself. Here is Peter's wife's 
mother, whom I cured of the fever by simply 
touching her. This is the woman who had been 
afflicted for twelve years, but who was restored to 
health only by touching my garment. These men 
were on the ship when I stilled the tempest and 
calmed the sea. This is the man who has had the 
palsy for thirty-eight years, but to whose withered 



THE TRIAL OF JESUS CHRIST 



20 



limbs, I gave strength to take up his bed and go 
into his own house. This is the man whose with- 
ered hand I told him to stretch forth, which lie did, 
and it became whole like the other. This man was 
lame and I made him walk : this one was deaf and 
I enabled him to hear : this one dumb, but I made 
him speak; this one blind from his birth, but I gave 
him sight. This young man was a lunatic, he 
would fall into the water and into the fire, but I 
clothed him in his right mind. This man and wom- 
an here is Jarius and his wife, whose daughter I 
raised from the dead, and the young woman stand- 
ing between them, with her hands in theirs, is the 
daughter herself. This is the widow's son, who 
rose from the dead when I touched his bier and 
said unto him. "'young man I command thee to 
arise." This man is Lazarus, who had been dead 
four days when I reached his tomb, but who, at 
my command, came out of the tomb in his grave 
clothes ; and these women here are Mary and Mar- 
tha, his sisters, who cared for him in his sickness, 
were with him at his death and saw him buried and 
witnessed his coming out of the tomb, and this 
body of men here are the assembled Jews, your 
countrymen and mine, who were there and heard 
Me say, "Lazarus, come forth," and saw him in 
obedience to my command come out of the tomb 
alive. Caiaphas, "I am the Christ, the Son of 
God, hereafter ye shall see the Son of Man sitting 
on the right hand power and coming in the clouds 
of heaven.'' / am ready for trial. Caiaphas and 



30 THE TRIAL OF JESUS CHRIST 

his Court would have fled from the judgment hall, 
as abruptly as did the money changers when Christ 
over-turned their tables and drove them from His 
Father's Temple. 

Besides the words of the great accused that he 
was, "the Son of God," were not blasphemously 
spoken, but were full of filial reverence for the 
Father. That they were false was of the essence 
of the crime and they should have been proven so 
to be before a conviction could legally be reached. 
An affirmative answer to the question of the High 
Priest, "Art Thou the Son of God," could never 
release a Hebrew tribunal from weighing the claim 
to the Messiahship. The judicial obligation resting 
on Caiaphas, when his adjuration was answered by 
Christ, by the words, "I am the Christ, the Son of 
God," was to respond. "What sign showeth Thou, 
then Jesus that we may see and believe Thee?" the 
claim alone to be the Messiah was no crime. To 
make it blasphemy it must be false, and when Caia- 
phas instead of calling on Christ for proof, closed 
the case, rent His garment and declared that He 
had spoken blasphemy, and led the Sanhedrin to 
pronounce on Him the judgment of death, it dis- 
closed a pre-concerted plan, to terminate the sem- 
blance of judicial proceedings which were about 
to result in failure — or it was a sudden inspiration 
of evil at a moment when the cold, hard,, cruel 
thoughts that had smouldered in the breast of the 
unjust judge blazed up at the touch of confronting 
righteousness into a final and murderous paroxysm. 



THE TRIAL OF JESUS CHRIST 



31 



And so was brought about this great condemnation 
and in regard to it we come to this conclusion. That 
a proceeding involving life and death, begun, con- 
tinued and finished in the course of one night, with 
witnesses against the accused, who were sought for 
by the judges, but whose testimony was not sus- 
tained by each other, commencing with interroga- 
tories, which Hebrew law did not sanction and end- 
ing with a demand for confession, which was by 
the law expressly forbidden and all followed twen- 
ty-four hours too soon by sentence of death, which 
described a simple claim to be the one who should 
fulfill the hopes erf Israel as blasphemy, that such a 
proceeding had neither the form nor the fairness 
of a judicial trial. And here ends our considera- 
tion of the trial of Jesus Christ before the Hebrew 
Sanhedrim 



PART SECOND. 



THE TRIAL BEFORE PILATE. 



PART SECOND. 



^ HOSE of you friends, who heard Part 
^ 5^ ^ First of this lecture, will remember that 
$ we ^ Saviour in the hands of Caia- 
phas and the Sanhedrin, unlawfully, un- 
justly, wickedly, and cruelly convicted of 
blasphemy and sentenced to death. But Palestine 
was at this time a Roman Province, and this sentence 
could not be carried out without the consent of the 
Roman Government, so early the next morning a 
council from the Sanhedrin led Him to Pilate, the 
Roman Governor, to get this consent, and we will 
now follow Him to that tribunal. 

The law of Moses , perpetuated, though modified 
by Christianity, has been more influential than any 
other code in the world. It was based on the word 
of God and addressed to all mankind. It had in 
it the spirit of Sinai. It was free from the degrada- 
tion of caste. It exceeded the wisdom of the Egypt- 
ians and was infinitely nobler even in sacred sym- 
bolism. It gave dignity to the citizen and strength 
to the nation. But it has had one rival in the 
mighty jurisprudence of Rome. The Roman law 
has been transfused into all our modern life. Law- 
yers of every nation look back with filial reverence 
to the great jurisconsuls, of the great age of the 
imperial republic. There have been races of men 
in the world, who reflected as there are races who 
do reflect, in an eminent degree, that deep sense of 
righteousness which lies at the root of all law. And 
of such races, ancient and modern, the greatest was 



36 



THE TRIAL OF JESUS CHRIST 



that which at this time ruled over Palestine and 
over the world. When the sceptre departed from 
Judah, it passed into the strong emitting hands of 
Rome. But already nations had begun to exchange 
their terrors of its warlike might for that admira- 
tion of its administrative wisdom which has grown 
upon the world ever since. Its influence is trace- 
able even now, two thousand years thereafter, to 
that innate instinct of justice which guided praetor 
and proconsul in every subject land long before Ul- 
pian or Gaius had written out that instinct into im- 
mortal law. 

At the time of which we speak, Pontius Pilate 
was the representative of Rome in Judea, governor, 
as he is called in the Gospels. It is important to 
note more fully what his position and powers were. 
He was the procurator, deputy, or attorney of Ti- 
berius Caesar, in that province. Governor with 
civil, criminal and military jurisdiction, directly re- 
sponsible to his great master at Rome. Now what 
was 1 the relation of the Emperor, himself, to the 
inhabitants of Judea and to the world. This is 
again important and should be remembered. When 
Augustus Caesar became the undisputed chief of 
the republic, and determined so to continue, he re- 
mained nominally a mere private nobleman or citi- 
zen. To Roman the name of King was intolerable, 
and absolutism 1 , except under republican forms was 
distasteful. He did not dare to attack the constitu- 
tion of the state so he effected his object in an- 
other way. He gathered into his own hands all 



THE TRIAL OF JESUS CHRIST 



37 



the powers and functions and accumulated upon his 
own head all honors and privileges, which the state 
had for centuries, distributed among its great mag- 
istrates and representatives. He became the per- 
petual leader of the legislative house. He became 
also perpetual Pontifex Maximus, or chief of the 
national religion. He became tribune or guardian 
of the people with his person, thereby, made sacred 
and inviolable. He became perpetual consul, or 
supreme magistrate over the whole Roman world, 
with the control of its revenues, the disposal of 
its armies and the execution of its laws. And lastly 
he became perpetual imperator or military chief 
whose sword swept the globe from Indus and Gibral- 
ter to the pole. Only in this one man was now accu- 
mulated, and concentrated, all that for centuries had 
broadened and expanded under the magnificent ab- 
straction of Rome. So he held in his hands all the 
essentials of imperial power. Tiberius, therefore, 
the first inheritor of this constitution of Augustus 
Caesar, was in the strictest sense the representative 
of that city that ruled the kings of the earth. And 
the Roman knight, that now ruled in Judea, was his 
representative in his public capacity. Strictly speak- 
ing, therefore, the governor of the Jewish nation 
at this time was Tiberius Caesar and Pilate whom 
the Jews quite properly called their governor was 
the procurator of the great proconsul, holding civil, 
criminal and military authority, by delegation, from 
him in whom was now concentrated the boundless 
authority of Rome. Such was the tribunal before 



3S 



THE TRIAL OF JESUS CHRIST 



which the council of the Sanhedrin is now to lead 
their prisoner. Pilate sat in his praetorium on that 
morning of the preparation for the pass over to 
transact business and administer justice as usual. 
In what spot in Jerusalem his judgment seat at 
this time was set up can not be certainly known. 
It may have been within the fortress and under 
the tower of Antonia, that visible symbol of Roman 
predominance, which frowned by the side of the 
temple. Much more probably however, it was He- 
rods praetorium, that magnificent palace to the north 
of the temple which Josephus describes, and which 
has been recently built by the Idumean kings. Their 
former palace was still in existence and the visit 
of the Roman procurator and the Tetrach of Gal- 
lilee, Herod Aintipas, to this pass over feast, while 
it raises the question which of them occupied the 
new and more splendid residence suggests also the 
inevitable rivalry and possible enmity of their re- 
lations. If we suppose that Pilate, like Floras, as- 
serted his right to occupy the new palace we may 
remember that its white marble semi-circle enclosed 
an open space, which looked out on the sacred City 
and was almost as public as the space between An- 
tonia and the temple. In the open space in front 
of this or any other praetorium the movable bema 
or tribunal could at once be set up. 

But on this morning Pilate was still sitting in 
the judgment hall. 

Outside was the roar and bustle of the eastern 
city, awakening on a Passover dawn. Within was 



THE TRIAL OF JESUS CHRIST 



39 



the clash of Roman steel, the altars of the Roman 
gods and likely the sculptured frown of Tiberius 
Caesar. 

Into that heathen chamber the priests and doctors 
of the Jewish nation would not enter during their 
sacred week and Pontius Pilate willingly removed 
their difficulty by coming with his soldier Lictors 
to the gate. His first words there as his eyes fell 
on the prisoner, who stood with a rope around his 
neck and his hands bound before him, was the in- 
dignant question, "What accusation bring ye 
against this man?" In this question we recognize 
at once the spontaneous voice of Roman justice. 
It .also suggested to those who had Christ in charge 
Pilate's authority and his power to review any 
judgment the Jewish Sanhedrin might have pro- 
nounced on Jesus Christ. It was too, the instinctive 
utterance of a judge acting under one of the legal 
maxims of Roman jurisprudence, that, "It is not the 
manner of Romans to deliver any man to die until 
that he which is accused, have the accusers face to 
face and have license to speak for himself concern- 
ing the crime charged against him." The chief 
priests and scribes evaded the question. "What ac- 
cusation bring ye against this man," is Pilate's ques- 
tion. "If he were not a malefactor we 
would not have delivered him up unto thee," 
is the answer of the chief priests and scribes 
who had led him to Pilate. This insolent 
evasion did not have the effect to propitiate Pilate, 
who instantly put the matter on its true footing, by 



40 



THE TRIAL OF JESUS CHRIST 



his calm and it seems to me under the circumstances 
his somewhat indignant or sarcastic reply. ''Take 
ye him and judge him, said Pilate, according to 
your law." Ah, they did not expect that answer; 
they were balked, and could go no further. They 
could condemn, but they could not execute their 
sentence without the consent of Pontius Pilate, and 
sullenly and with an air of injured innocence they 
answer, "It is not lawful for us to put any man to 
death.'' This statement revealed that there was 
something they were trying to cover up, in their 
answer, by the use of the word "malefactor," in- 
stead of telling Pilate what their charge against 
Christ was. They did not like to confess to him 
that they had convicted Christ of blasphemy and 
sentenced him to death without any accusation be- 
ing preferred against Him. They hoped to pass by 
that, and secure his approval of their death sen- 
tence, without an investigation by him, of the of- 
fense of which they had convicted Him, or of the 
sentence of death even they had pronounced upon 
Him. The Talmud asserts that "forty years before 
the destruction of the temple, judgment in capital 
causes was taken away from Israel." The chronolgy 
of this statement may not be strictly accurate; but 
the Jews were a conquered and subject nation, and 
their jurisdiction on many subjects would likely be 
restricted, and if in anything, on the power of life 
and death. Of this they reminded Pilate when they 
answered him, "It is not lawful for us to put any 
man to death." The effort on the part of these Je ws 



THE TRIAL OF JESUS CHRIST 



41 



was to get Pilate's consent to, or approval of the 
sentence of Caiaphas and the Sanhedrin, and to 
prevent him from assuming full jurisdiction and 
authority and responsibility in the case, whether 
original or of review. 

But the first words of the Procurator when he 
met the chief priests and scribes with their prisoner 
at the gate, bound Pilate publicly to deal with this 
case not in an administrative but in a judicial cap- 
acity. The supreme civil ruler had now interposed 
his jurisdiction between an accused man and the 
diief authorities of a subject nation, and his honest 
careful deliberate and candid judgment in a case of 
life and death was after he was sufficiently informed 
to be given. But now there must be an accusation. 
Remember Caiaphas and his Sanhedrin had convict- 
ed Christ of blasphemy and sentenced Him to death 
without any accusation being made against Him, 
but because He had declared Himself in open court 
m answer to questions asked Him to be, "The Christ, 
the Son of God" without His accusers proving it to 
be false ; or permitting Christ even to prove it to be 
true. These accusers doubtless thought that if they 
preferred this charge of blasphemy against Christ, 
Pilate would consider it a religious or ecclesiastical 
question and pay but little attention to it, and so they 
would fail to secure his approval of their death sen- 
tence. They therefore invented a charge and in an- 
swer to Pilate's question, finally replied, ''We found 
this man perverting the nation and forbidding to 
give tribute to Caesar, saying that He, Himself is 



42 



THE TRIAL OF JESUS CHRIST 



Christ, a king." This is a very different charge 
from that which they had convicted Him. Per- 
verting the nation seems to be somewhat ambiguous. 
Perverting what nation, the Roman or the Jewish ? 
To which, if either, did Christ owe allegiance? He 
was a Jew. His natural allegiance, therefore, was to 
the Jewish nation. But that nation had been sub- 
jected to the Roman power. Did Christ, therefore, 
owe allegiance to the latter? Yes, He undoubtedly 
did, but this charge at all events was intended to be 
a charge of treason against Rome, But "perverting 
the nation" in what manner? What had He done. 
"And forbidding to give tribute to Caesar. " If the 
first charge, the ambiguous charge of "perverting the 
nation" were true, the second, "forbidding to give 
tribute to Caesar" was false. Instead of forbidding 
to give tribute to Caesar, Christ had said', "Render, 
therefore, unto Caesar the things that are Caesar's 
and unto God the things that are God's." If tribute 
were due from the Jewish to the Roman nation He 
had not interfered with it. "Saying that He, Him- 
self, was Christ, a king" was true, but it was not 
true in the sense that His accusers desired it to be 
received by the Roman governor. But the prompt 
utterance of the Procurator forced them into the vil- 
lainy they doubtless would have avoided, and so 
between the ambiguous charge of "Perverting the 
nation," upon the one hand, and claiming the royal 
Messiahship upon the other, they thrust the false- 
hood, "Forbidding to give tribute to Caesar." They 
desired to make it impossible for Pilate to overlook 



THE TRIAL OF JESUS CHRIST 



43 



the charge of treason against Rome. There is \Y 
mistake as to what they wished Pilate to consider 
it was, they charged Christ with. It was majestas. 
The greatest crime known in Roman law, an attack 
upon the Sovereignty or supreme majesty of the 
Roman state. This charge, under the Roman law, 
if made against a Roman citizen, must be in writing, 
specifying the acts which constitute the treason. But 
if made against a provincial Jew it was not necessary 
for it to be in writing. Christ, therefore, stood be- 
fore the Roman judge, who could summarily exer- 
cise absolute power, even the power of life and death, 
charged with the crime of treason against Rome, 
which was punishable by death, and that death, by 
crucifixion. His situation, therefore, was extremely 
perilous. The skill and ability now shown by Pilate 
upon the one side, and Christ upon the other, is 
very remarkable. 

If you will follow me carefully and thoughtfully 
through, you will see with what consummate ability- 
Pilate conducted this prosecution, or investigation, 
upon the one side and Christ, the defense, upon 
the other. 

Both of them now being in the judgment hall, 
Pilate thinking perhaps he might catch Christ oft 
His guard, suddenly put this question to Him, ''Art 
Thou the King of the Jews?" To have answered, 
yes, would have been a confession of the charge of 
treason. It would have been equivalent to claiming 
that the Jews were His subjects, and not the subjects 
of Tiberius Caesar, and so a conflict of authority 



44 



THE TRIAL OF JESUS CHRIST 



would at once arise. Against the claims of such a 
person, it was the official duty of Pilate to protect 
his government. To have answered no, would have 
been to deny his spiritual kingship, and Christ could 
not do that; so he answered, "Sayest thou this of 
thyself, or did others tell it thee of Me?" This 
was not as one might at first suppose, a request to 
know what others were saying of Him during His 
absence. He was indifferent as to that. These 
words had a deeper significance ; they were equiva- 
lent to this question, and to this explanation. In 
what sense, Pilate, dost thou use the expression? 
If thou sayest it of thyself, in the sense in which 
a Roman would naturally use the word, then I am 
not the king of the Jews. But if others told it thee 
of me, if others told thee what I have said, and thou 
art using the words of Hebrew prophesy, or of the 
world's hope, then before I answer, I want to make 
an explanation. It seems to me as if Pilate's an- 
swer showed some impatience, perhaps anger. He 
said, "Am I a Jew?" equivalent to saying, I am no 
Jew, and then he added, "Thine own nation and the 
chief priests have delivered thee unto me. What 
hast thou done?" The answer of Jesus to this 
question and to this declaration of Pilate let a flood 
of light into the soul of the Roman judge. He who 
had remained silent before the midnight Sanhedrin, 
and who made even now no answer to their dis- 
simulated accusation, frankly responded to the 
Roman Governor, who evidently desired to know 
the truth of the case. He said, "My kingdom is not 



THE TRIAL OF JESUS CHRIST 



45 



of this world, 1 ' and then he argued it in this way to 
Pilate. He said, "If my kingdom were of this world 
then would my servants fight; that I should not be 
delivered to the Jews." He did not claim to be a 
king because of his lineal descent from David, an 
earthly king. His title to royalty was derived from 
a higher source. 

This declaration is to be considered particu- 
larly in a forensic and judicial sense. It implies a 
kingship, but it specially avoids the particular kind 
of kingship charged. It seems to acknowledge that 
a kingdom of this world might be a legitimate ob- 
ject of attack by Caesar's deputy, but it denies that 
a kingdom not of this world should be an object 
of attack from any of the powders of earth. That 
Christ had no desire to attack Caesar's empire, is 
evident from the famous scene of the tribute money. 
He is asked, "Is it lawful to give tribute to Caesar, 
or 110?" He replies, "Show me a penny." One is 
shown him. He asks, "Whose image and super- 
scription is this?" He is told that it is Caesar's. 
He replies, "Render, therefore (that is because they 
are Caesar's), unto Caesar, the things that are 
Caesar's, and unto God the things that are God's." 
Christ's argument was this, that as this coin came 
from Caesar's mint, as it had on it Caesar's stamp, 
it was his, and should be returned to him. He 
wanted nothing that was Caesar's, not even a penny. 
This makes it certain that it was no part of Christ's 
plan to attack the Roman power, and that the charge 
pf treason against Rome was false. That as his 



46 



THE TRIAL OF JESUS CHRIST 



kingdom was not of this world, his servants were 
not expected to fight. The opposite, however, fol- 
lows, which Pilate doubtless observed, that is, that 
a monarch of a kingdom of this world may be de- 
fended by an armed force of his subjects. This 
doubtless made a deep impression upon Pilate, and 
probably convinced him that Christ was innocent 
of any contemplated conspiracy against Rome. And 
yet he had spoken of a kingdom, a kingdom, too, 
in this world, but not of it. Pilate now, with true 
judicial tact, puts his finger on the exact point which 
he desires to be brought from negative implication 
to express statement or declaration on the part of 
Jesus Christ. "Art thou then a king?" he asked of 
his prisoner. 

As before the adjuration of the high priest, so 
now the representative of all the greatness of earth 
and heaven answered, making a crisis in the world's 
history, "Thou sayest it' 5 (that is, I am a king). He 
who spoke so to the Roman governor knew that he 
was offering himself to the cross, and that the next 
few hours might close his fateful life. And then he 
carefully and cautiously added, "To this end was I 
born, and for this cause came I into the world, that 
I might bear witness unto the truth. 55 This supreme 
utterance entered deeper into the mind and h^art 
of Pilate than the assertion even of separate spir- 
itual and earthly kingdoms. It proclaimed that 
which is the basis of all human veracity and virtue — 
the existence of an eternal world of truth, outside of 
man; a universal and divine system of things, over 



THE TRIAL OF JESUS CHRIST 



47 



which men have no power, but which it is their high- 
est privilege to recognize and confess. And those 
do recognize it who are of the truth. Christ proceed- 
ed, "He that is of the truth heareth my voice.'' 
Pilate, interrupting Him, asks, "What is Truth?" 

No answer to this question is recorded. I have 
wondered, however, if one were not given. I have 
wondered if Christ did not tell Pilate there in the 
judgment hall, what that Truth was to which He 
had come to bear witness. If he did not tell him, 
that He had no earthly possession, and wanted none, 
that His kingdom was the kingdom of peace and 
love, of righteousness and mercy, of kindness and 
charity, strictly spiritual. That he was on this earth 
to inculcate every virtue, and lead a spotless life. 
That earthly titles had no charm for Him, that the 
world was lying in sin, and He had come to re- 
deem it. I have wondered if Christ did not say to 
Pilate there in answer to that qeustion, "/ am the 
truth," "'the resurrection and the life." But whether 
He did so or not, something convinced Pilate, and 
he took Him out on the tessalated pavement and 
pronounced Him innocent. 

Judges in their decisions never go beyond the 
questions submitted to them, but here was a judge 
who went way beyond the questions submitted to 
him. He not only declared that Christ was inno- 
cent of the infraction of any Roman law, but he de- 
clared Him to be without a fault. He said, "I find 
in Him no fault at all/' Wonderful statement! 
Where has there ever been a man on trial, except 



48 



THE TRIAL OF JESUS CHRIST 



Jesus Christ, of whom his judge could say, "I find 
in Him no fault at all." He is a sinless man. This 
was the conviction of a judge who desired to be 
just, and honest, but of a weak and vascillating man. 
It was also the first step which finally developed 
into a weak and cowardly course of indecision, com- 
placence, bluster, subserviency, persuasion, evasion, 
protest, compromise, reluctance, duplicity and cow- 
ardice that has forever photographed this Roman 
governor as an unjust and cowardly judge. As soon 
as this determination that there was no fault in 
Christ was announced by Pilate, there came from 
the chief priests and the mob a storm of accusa- 
tion. "And they were the more fierce, saying, He 
stirreth up the people, teaching throughout all Jew- 
ery, from Galilee to Jerusalem." They accused him 
of many things. And Pilate, growing weaker and 
weaker, asked him, saying, "Answereth thou noth- 
ing?" "Behold how many things they accuse thee 
of." 

Poor, weak man! He had but just acquitted 
Him, and declared Him to be without a fault, and 
that should have ended the matter. But see now how 
he turns against Christ. Yet Jesus no more an- 
swered anything insomuch that Pilate marvelled." 
But Pilate caught at the mention of Galilee, and 
asked whether the man were a Galilean. Being in- 
formed that he was, he sent him to Herod Antipas, 
who was governor of Galilee, but was then in Jeru- 
salem. Pilate desired to rid himself of this trouble- 
some prisoner. Troublesome because he knew Him 



THE TRIAL OF JESUS CHRIST 



49 



to be innocent on the one hand, and because the 
Chief Priests, Scribes and Elders thirsted for His 
blood on the other. But the Jews followed Him 
and vehemently accused Him before Herod. Herod, 
However, politely and prudently declined to take 
jurisdiction of the case; and after asking Christ 
many questions and receiving no answer, he, to- 
gether with his soldiers, mocked Him, arrayed Him 
in a gorgeous robe, and returned Him to Pilate. 
This was a white robe, the Jewish royal color, and 
Herod's object in clothing Christ with it may have 
been to show his contempt for such a king, or, it 
may have been to ridicule the Jew r s by presenting 
to them Christ as their king, dressed in royal robes, 
and to irritate them as the toreador waves the red 
flag. But here w^as a man charged with majestas, 
standing at Caesar's judgment seat, and must be 
judged, and the "Idumean Fox,' 7 as Christ called 
Herod Antipas (Luke 13 :31-32), may have dreaded 
the lion's paw which was in Rome, and sought to 
avoid it by exchanging courtesies with the lion's 
deputy at Jerusalem. So he sent Pilate a note, 
which, being translated and made to conform to a 
-imilar communication from one judge to another, 
n our day, reads as follows : 

"Asmonean Palace, Jerusalem. 
Friday, April IS, A. U. C. 783. 
(That is 783 years from the founding of the 
City of Rome.) 
Honorable Pontius Pilate: 



50 



THE TRIAL OF JESUS CHRIST 



I have examined Jesus of Nazareth, according 
to your request, and find no cause of death in him. 

Herod Antipas, 
Governor of Galilee;' 
Then Pilate called together the Chief Priests, 
Scribes and Rulers and said unto them reproach- 
fully, "You brought this man unto me as one who 
perverted the people, and behold, I having exam- 
ined Him before you, found no fault in this man, 
touching those things whereof you accuse him. No! 
Nor yet Herod, for I sent you to Him, and 
behold, nothing worthy of death has been done by 
Him; I will, therefore, chastise Him and release 
Him." Oh, what weakness, what cowardice ! What 
was he going to whip Christ for, if there was no 
fault in Him? What an infamous attempt to com- 
promise with the mob. Pilate now offers to mangle 
an innocent man with the savage Roman scourge, 
with an army at his command, and five hundred 
Roman soldiers at his side, he makes this offer to 
appease the demands of the chief priests, and the 
mob, consisting of but a portion, indeed a minority 
of a conquered and a subject nation, of which he 
was governor, possessed of absolute power with the 
great Republic of Rome to sustain him. Pilate's 
duty was plain. He should have said, with indig- 
nation, "You brought this man unto me as one who 
perverted the people, and behold, I having exam- 
ined Him before you, found no fault in this man, 
touching those things whereof you accuse Him. No ! 
Nor yet Herod, for he sent Him back unto us, and 



THE TRIAL OF JESUS CHRIST 



51 



behold, nothing worthy of death had been done by 
Him, I shall therefore release Him and discharge 
Him and protect Him, with all the power of Im- 
perial Rome." If he had done this, he 
would have shown himself to be a worthy judge. 
But the Jews refused his infamous and cowardly 
offer of compromise. And Pilate, in his report in 
defense erf his act of concession to the Jews, there- 
after made to Tibereas Caesar, says, "I have at 
length been forced to consent to the crucifixion of 
Jesus Christ to prevent a tumult among the Jews, 
though it was very much against my will, for the 
world never saw and probably never will see, a 
man of such extraordinary piety and uprightness. 
I did all I could to save Him from the malice of the 
Jews, but the fear of a total insurrection made me 
sacrifice Him, to the peace and interest of your 
empire." 

Pilate doubtless tried in good faith to save 
Christ, but either was not possessed of the 
courage required, or desired to be considered popu- 
lar with the Jews. Probably the latter. He left 
them, however, with the impression that he had sent 
Him to the cross, but intended to make an appeal 
to their compassion before he finally did so. He 
attempted, perhaps, in accordance with a custom 
to satisfy his conscience by the idle ceremony of 
washing from his hands blood yet unshed, but for 
the shedding of which he thereafter became respon- 
sible, and by making this false statement to the 
multitude, "I am innocent of the blood of this right- 



52 



THE TRIAL OF JESUS CHRIST 



eous man/ 5 Then Pilate, that is, his soldiers under 
his direction, scourged Jesus. We will make no 
attempt to describe this terrible flagilation. It is 
too horrible to dwell upon for one moment. 

When this was over, and He was passing 
through the judgment hall, preparatory to going to 
Calvary, Pilate saw Him there with his hands tied, 
bruised and mangled, crowned with thorns, the blood 
oozing from a score of gashes, coursing its way 
down His cheeks, His beard and His garments, 
even to the very floor; and as he stood and gazed 
on the pale face of the friendless, defenseless, swoon- 
ing, bleeding Christ, clothed in the scarlet robe, 
soaked through and through with His blood, that 
precious blood that redeemed the world, he could 
not help but pity Him, and, in the hope that he 
might move the mob to compassion, he led 
Him out on the pavement and said to the multi- 
tude, "Ec ce homo" (behold the man). And the 
chief priests and officers cried out, "Crucify Him, 
crucify Him, His blood be upon us and our chil- 
dren. " Oh, what a curse they brought down upon 
themselves and their posterity, and how fearfully 
has Heaven executed it. And Pilate said, "Why, 
what evil hath he done?'' But they cried the more, 
"Crucify Him, crucify Him/' and Pilate said, "Take 
ye Him and crucify Him, for I find no fault in 
Him." So here they secured the cowardly approval 
of Pontius Pilate to the death sentence, which he 
knew to be wrong, that Caiaphas and the Sanhedrin 
had pronounced on Jesus Christ. And the chief 



THE TRIAL OF JESUS CHRIST 



53 



priests, trying to justify their conduct, answered 
Pilate and said, "We have a law, and by that law 
He ought to die, for He made Himself the Son of 
God." 

The Son of God ! mused Pilate. This was the 
first he had heard of that. The Son of God ! The 
Son of God! 

I must know what that means before I further 
go. This mysterious man may be from another 
world. I will ask Him. And then Pilate trembling- 
ly said to Jesus, there in the judgment hall, "Whence 
art thou?" But from the first moment of his in- 
decision, Jesus had given him no answer. Pilate, 
now r full of wrath, attempted to intimidate His 
suffering victim. Oh, cowardice and infamy be- 
yond example! "Speaketh thou not to me?" said 
Pilate. Pontius Pilate, this representative of the 
great Roman Republic, this deputy of Tiberias 
Caesar. "Speakest thou not to me? Knowest thou 
not that I have power to crucify Thee, and the power 
to release Thee?" Jesus gives the final word of 
answer, and how like a God. If you are in doubt 
as to whether Christ was divine, make Him a man 
among men, and see if he stays there. Hear His 
answer to this question of the representative of that 
Imperial City that ruled the world, "Thou couldst 
have no power at all against Me, unless it were 
given thee from above/' Equivalent to saying, the 
power you have over Me. Pilate, does not come 
from Rome or Tiberias Caesar, but it comes from 
My kingdom. I could arrest it by a word, or a 



54 



THE TRIAL OF JESUS CHRIST 



thought, or a wish. It is you, poor Pilate, who are 
weakest. 

Jesus pitied the hopeless bewilderment of Pilate 
whom guilt and cowardice had changed from a 
ruler to a slave. In His compassion He said to 
him there in the judgment hall, "He who hath de- 
livered Me unto thee, hath the greater sin." Equiva- 
lent to saying, thou art committing a terrible crime, 
Pilate, but Judas and Annas and Caiaphas, the 
Sanhedrin and these Jews are more to blame than 
thou. 

Thus with infinite dignity and infinite tender- 
ness, did Jesus judge His judge. It is not surpris- 
ing that this scene or these words, or these thoughts 
should have prompted Pilate to make one more 
effort to save himself from his own weakness, but 
it was too late. The Jewish heirarchs had now 
taken the full measure of the man, and their final 
argument was well fitted to break down in him all 
of the little conscience and courage that remained. 
Here it is, "If thou let this man go thou art not 
Caesar's friend; whosoever maketh himself a king 
speaketh against Caesar. " Pilate was a personal 
dependent upon the favor of. the Emperor. He had 
procured his position through §ejanus, who was 
about this time deposed from power, and was in 
disgrace at Rome. Pilate's fear was not ground- 
less. Tiberias was on the throne a few years later, 
when Pontius Pilate was superceded, and embassa- 
dors from Palestine, relying on the attachment of 
their nation, to the imperial house, were sent to 



THE TRIAL OF JESUS CHRIST 



55 



Rome to testify against the degraded and recalled 
governor. The shadow of that not very distant, 
but surely approaching day, paralyzed Pilate, on that 
fateful Friday morning. What, he thought, if there 
should be a riot, and I should be accused before 
Caesar of spoliation and bloodshed; and suppose, 
too, that there should be added to these that other 
charge, faithlessness to Caesar, which was the com- 
pliment and crown of every other crime. Pilate 
had held out against every other argument, but fell 
before the well chosen words, "If thou let this 
man go, thou art not Caesar's friend; whosoever 
maketh himself a king speaketh against Caesar." 
A final sentence could only be pronounced by a 
Roman judge from the judgment seat. Pilate 
ascended the tribunal, and now there came to him 
a message — a message from a kind and loving hand \ 
it was from P££cula i his wife, "Have thou nothing 
to do with that just man." Then Pilate, feeling en- 
couraged, and thinking he saw a way of escape, 
turned to the multitude, and said, "Which of the 
two will ye that I release unto you, Barabas, the 
robber and murderer, or Jesus?" Fatal question! 
Fatal hesitation ! Fatal error ! And they answered 
him, "Barabas," and Pilate said, "What, then, shall 
I do with Jesus?" and they cried, "Crucify Him, 
crucify Him, let Him be crucified," and Pilate said 
with bitter irony, "Shall I crucify your king?" But 
the Jews were equal to the sarcasm and shouted, 
"We have no king but Caesar." Then Pilate, turn- 
ing to the suffering Christ, said, "Ibis ad crucem" — 



56 



THE TRIAL OF JESUS CHRIST 



translated, "You must go to the cross. " 

What now is our conclusion ? It is this : That 
there were two trials and that both were conducted 
with but very slight regard to the forms of the two 
most famous jurisprudences of the world. That in 
both the judges were unjust and the trials unfair. 
That Christ died because in the Jewish Sanhedrin, 
or Ecclesiastical Council, He claimed to be the Son 
of God, and the Messiah of Israel, and in the world- 
wide Roman tribunal because He claimed to be 
Christ, a king. That Pilate surrendered Him to the 
fury of the mob, of which he himself became a part ; 
that His crucifixion was murder, and the blood shed 
on Calvary was the blood of murder. 

Now^, my friends, putting these two lectures 
together, I have been speaking to you at considerable 
length, more than two hours, about the most mo- 
mentous event in history, and you have listened to 
me very patiently, and I thank you for it, but I 
want your attention a few minutes longer. 

The trial and crucifixion of Jesus Christ has 
no parallel in importance in the annals of time. 

What was that providence that made every de- 
cision of the Hebrew Tribunal in that trial wrong, 
and every word uttered by Christ, and every posi- 
tion taken by Him, and every silence by Him main- 
tained, right? 

What was that Providence that made every 
decision of the Roman Tribunal right, and yet that 
sent Him to the cross. 

Listen! v No crucifixion, no cross; no cross, no 



THE TRIAL OF JESUS CHRIST 



57 



Christ; no Christ, no Christian religion, no redemp- 
tion! 

The hour that Christ, so many times said, had not 
yet come, had now come — the hour of His death. 

It was the most critical hour, the most crowded 
with great events, since hours began to be numbered, 
since time began to run. It was the hour in which 
Christ was glorified by His sufferings. It was the 
supreme hour of distress and of blood. It is dis- 
tress that enables every great character, and it was 
distress that glorified the Son of God. In this hour 
he taught all mankind how to suffer and how to 
die. What magnanimity in all his words and ac- 
tions,- on this great occasion ! No upbraiding, no 
complaining expression escapes his lips. He be- 
trayed no symptoms of a weak, a discomposed or an 
impatient mind. With all the dignity of a sover- 
eign, he conferred pardon on a penitent fellow suf- 
ferer; with a greatness of mind beyond example He 
spent His last moments in apologies and prayers for 
those who were shedding His blood. "Father, for- 
give them, for they know not what they do." This 
was the hour in which Christ atoned for the sins 
of mankind, and accomplished the redemption of the 
world. The hour when the great sacrifice was 
offered up, the efficacy of which reaches back to 
the first transgression of man, and extends forward 
to the end of time. The hour when from the cross 
as from an high altar the blood was flowing, that 
washed away the guilt of the nations. This was the 
hour, when the long series of prophecies, visions, 



53 



THE TRIAL OF JESUS CHRIST 



types and symbols were accomplished. You behold 
all the priests and sacrifices, all the rights and ordi- 
nances, all the types and symbols assembled to- 
gether, to receive their consummation. It was the 
hour of the abolition of the Jewish law of sacrifice, 
and the introduction of the Gospel. The hour of 
terminating the old and beginning the new dispensa- 
tions. Far and wide over the vast throng of His 
enemies, He cried with a loud voice, and almost in 
His last breath, as if giving His final shout of eter- 
nal triumph, "It is finished !" When he uttered these 
words he announced the accomplishment of His 
mission — the redemption of mankind. 

He fixed the ever memorable point of time, 
which separates the old religious era from the new. 
On one side of the point of separation ; you behold 
the law with its priests, its altars, its sacrifices, its 
rights, and ceremonies retiring from sight. On 
the other side you behold the Gospel, with its simple 
and venerable institutions coming forward into view. 
Significantly was the veil of the inner sanctuary of 
the temple rent in twain, as if the Eternal God came 
out to lead His Son to glory. This was the hour 
when the legal high priest delivered up his Urim, his 
Thummim, his breast plate, his robes and his in- 
cense, and Christ stood forth as the great High 
Priest of all succeeding generations. Altars on 
which the fire had blazed for ages were now to 
smoke no more. This was the hour that shook 
the foundations of every pagan temple. When the 
priest fled from his falling shrine, and the heathen 



THE TRIAL OF JESUS CHRIST 



59 



oracles became dumb forever. This was the hour 
in which the Saviour erected that spiritual kingdom 
which is never to end. The hour when His enemies 
imagined they had accomplished their plan for His 
destruction. The reed which they placed in His 
hands became a rod of iron. The sceptre with which 
He was to rule the world in righteousness. The 
cross which they thought was to stigmatize Him 
with infamy, became the ensign of His renown. In- 
stead of being the reproach of His followers, it was 
to be their boast and glory. It was to hang from the 
neck of beauty to be assumed as the distinction of 
the most powerful monarchs, and to wave in the 
banners of victorious armies when the memory of 
Herod and Pilate should be accursed, when Jerusa- 
lem should be reduced to ashes and the Jews should 
have no country, but should be wanderers over all 
the earth. 



Deacidified using the Bookkeeper process. 
Neutralizing agent: Magnesium Oxide 
Treatment Date: July 2005 

PreservationTechnologies 

A WORLD LEADER IN PAPER PRESERVATION 

1 1 1 Thomson Park Drive 
Cranberry Township, PA 16066 
(724) 779-2111 



LIBRARY OF CONGRESS 















7^ 




014 229 24 




6, 



